Return to Answer

You state that pointers are references in memory, than all memory can be pointers. Higher level languages claim to not use pointers but that seems impossible because it has to use memory. It can't create anything that references itself outside of itself.

This is called self-deception, you convince yourself there is no need for self-reference to make a claim for higher abstraction.

This IS an ontological argument in itself, using an analogy would make it clearer that it is an ontological claim: Someone wants to believe that there is something outside of reality/existence. So they deceive themselves that references to reality can be made that do not come from reality/existence despite the fact that for something to make a reference it has to exist.

You state that pointers are references in memory, than all memory can be pointers. Higher level languages claim to not use pointers but that seems impossible because it has to use memory. It can't create anything that references itself outside of itself.

This is called self-deception: one convinces oneself there is no need for references/pointers only to make a claim for a higher level of abstraction.

This IS an ontological argument in itself, using an analogy would make it clearer that it is an ontological claim: Someone wants to believe that there is something outside of reality/existence. So they deceive themselves that references to reality can be made that do not come from reality/existence despite the fact that for something to make a reference it has to exist.

Edit: You state that if a pointer is just a memory ref, than that means all memory can be pointers.

A similar ask in an ontological point of view is that if matter points to other matter (such as a human pointing to an apple) that means that it is possible that the apple can point back.

I believe you are making a case for panpsychism, the idea that all matter has conciousness, by eluding to the fact that if matter is conciousness (a pointer is memory) than any matter can be conciousness(all memory can be a pointer).

Marko: Everything in the universe has conciousness.

Chris: Nothing in the universe has conciousness.

Edit: The referendum is important because there is no evasion. There is an ontological argument being made, in my interpretation, which is panpsychism. I guess you can say that people just don't want to admit it or don't realize that they are doing so...

You state that pointers are references in memory, than all memory can be pointers. Higher level languages claim to not use pointers but that seems impossible because it has to use memory. It can't create anything that references itself outside of itself.

This is called self-deception, you convince yourself there is no need for self-reference to make a claim for higher abstraction.

This IS an ontological argument in itself, using an analogy would make it clearer that it is an ontological claim: Someone wants to believe that there is something outside of reality/existence. So they deceive themselves that references to reality can be made that do not come from reality/existence despite the fact that for something to make a reference it has to exist.

Your question ask if a pointer is just a memory ref, than that means all memory can be pointers.

A similar ask in an ontological point of view is that if matter points to other matter (such as a human pointing to an apple) that means that it is possible that the apple can point back.

I believe you are making a case for panpsychism, the idea that all matter has conciousness, by eluding to the fact that if matter is conciousness (a pointer is memory) than any matter can be conciousness(all memory can be a pointer).

Marko: Everything in the universe has conciousness.

Chris: Nothing in the universe has conciousness.

Edit: The referendum is important because there is no evasion. There is an ontological argument being made, in my interpretation, which is panpsychism.

Edit: You state that if a pointer is just a memory ref, than that means all memory can be pointers.

A similar ask in an ontological point of view is that if matter points to other matter (such as a human pointing to an apple) that means that it is possible that the apple can point back.

I believe you are making a case for panpsychism, the idea that all matter has conciousness, by eluding to the fact that if matter is conciousness (a pointer is memory) than any matter can be conciousness(all memory can be a pointer).

Marko: Everything in the universe has conciousness.

Chris: Nothing in the universe has conciousness.

Edit: The referendum is important because there is no evasion. There is an ontological argument being made, in my interpretation, which is panpsychism. I guess you can say that people just don't want to admit it or don't realize that they are doing so...